There's an interview out there somewhere with Gerry Philbin and he speaks candidly of Joe. It's pretty revealing and the comparison to Mickey is valid. Philbin said that Joe squandered his early career. Joe was an alcoholic, like Mickey
That's the point, you can only form that opinion on the opinions of others so that's why I have a hard time critiquing players I didn't see. Some folks will complain about some of the greats from yesteryear but I generally won't do that. I'd be basing my opinion on someone else's agenda or predilections or separate criteria. That's ok for some folks, I guess. _
Thanks, Walt. I'll look for it. It's so sad that anyone would squander his/her life on drinking and/or drugs or any kind of "addiction."
BTW, I don't "make anything up"; everything I say is well-documented and supported by countless others; time-tested truths and logical conclusions that most people consider obvious. Thinking that everything in the world is just a happy accident that came from nothing is what the rest of us call "make believe". And when I said you "condemn Geno for interceptions", I guess I was talking about the plural "you", meaning all of the Geno haters on this board. I guess I assumed you were one of them, so I apologize if I was wrong about that...but other than the SB win, what else separates Namath from Geno? They both have been good at moving their team downfield and getting the ball in the end zone - yes, even Geno, despite his inconsistency, has put a lot of points on the board given the lack of talent around him. If he had Marshall and Devin Smith last year, who knows, perhaps nobody would be criticizing him this year. But both Namath and Geno, so far in his career anyway, have thrown lots of interceptions. My point is, why do Namath fans overlook his interceptions, while many of those same fans criticize Geno constantly for the same thing? I guess the answer is obvious, Namath won the only SB we have in our history.
I don't think this is the interview itself, but rather an allusion to it, if it's the same interview of which you're thinking. Was the interview a part of the NFL Special "America's Game" about the Jets victory in SB III? Here's the link to a blog post that mentions what Philbin had to say: http://offwing.com/tag/gerry-philbin It's the only thing I can find, so that must be it.
Call him a lair. He doesn't like being called that. Or he doesn't care if you call him a lair. Depends on which one you want to believe. Because he sure doesn't know.
Dude, if you really think the only thing that separates Geno and Namath, then you're beyond help...totally clueless, ignorant beyond belief and delusional.
OK, if you say so, lol. (don't bother giving any reasons for your opinion or anything) I think you've been listening to Stokes for too long, making outlandish statements and accusations with nothing to back it up except "because I say so, that's why"! Or, you are a stupid poopy head if you don't agree with me...lol! I think the next time he posts something I'm just going to respond with "I know you are but what am I", or "I'm rubber and you're glue, whatever you say bounces off me and sticks back to you"! LMAO! That's the kind of mentality we're dealing with. Another poster just made the mistake of trying to reason with him, and after about 3 pages of nonsense decided it was useless...we should have warned him about what he was getting himself into.
I saw it on TV. It may have been an NFL Films thing. I don't remember the context of it or what it was apart of, sorry. I definitely saw it tho. He said that when Joe got serious and became a leader is when they won the Championship. And that they could've done better earlier than that. But Joe was not committed to the team. He was partying
Dude have you not paid any attention to the posts in this thread? Did you read the articles linked? If you did, then it's just further proof how ignorant and clueless you are. We lived through that era. We know what the game was like. We know the talent Joe had and how big he was in the game. Should he have taken the game more seriously and partied a lot less? Undoubtedly. But Geno doesn't have a 10th of the talent Namath had. Geno is doing the best he can and is mediocre. Namath was playing with crippling injuries and probably hung over half the time or legs weakened from debauchery and he still was a great QB. Do you have any understanding at all what an accomplishment it was for Namath to throw for 4,000 yards when he did or how he led and carried the team? Geno hasn't led or carried the Jets to anything except a meaningless win or two a the end of seasons. Joe was clutch. Geno folds under pressure. You can't call me a hater, either, because I wanted the Jets to draft Geno and have been rooting for him. The truth is that he has been awful. Has he had the handicaps of horrible receivers, poor OG play, incompetent coaching from his OC and HC? Yes, but he still could have played better and done more on his own. Other QBs have. I'm hoping he puts it all together and proves all his "haters" wrong this season, but to compare him with Namath is flat out wrong, stupid and delusional. It shows no understanding of the differences of their talents, of the game itself and the different eras.
This was all explained pages and pages ago but this is what trolls do. They post idiocy and disappear, posters point out the error of their ways, the trolls ignore it and come back 2 days later to post the same idiocy. _
The guy told me to STFU so I had to stupidly reply and go down to his level. Which is pretty low. I wish I'd just not answered him.
OK, that's a fair post, and an intelligent reply. Refreshing, given some of the other empty posts we have to wade through in these threads. And I have uncles who are big Jets fans who grew up idolizing Namath; that's why I became a Jets fan in the first place. And I understand what you are saying about it being a different era, and that you can't go solely by stats. I agree with your whole first paragraph, actually, because it is logical and reasonable and it makes sense. Plus I have heard the same thing from others who lived in that era. I myself did not; the earliest Jets teams I remember were led by Ken O'Brien. But when you say Geno has been "awful", that's a gross exaggeration. He has been inconsistent, alternating good games and bad ones, with a few great games thrown in. He has performed fairly well, I'd say, for a 3rd year QB who was thrust into the starting lineup before he was ready. Recall that he was considered very raw coming out of WVU, and that he came from the same kind of spread system that Mariota came from. That's why people said then that he would need at least 2 or 3 years to develop, just like they said this year about Mariota. And Geno had few weapons around him. So it's too soon to bury him, that's my main point. And ironically, I hated the pick when we drafted him, and I was one of the harshest Geno bashers back then (that was before I joined this board)....I can't believe I am now working so hard to defend him on here! I realize he looks like an airhead and makes bone-headed mistakes from time to time, but despite that I have seen enough promise to think that he deserves another shot, this time with a decent OC and much better talent around him.
I've never seen something so ironic in my entire life!.....you have just described to a T what you do on this board! That's why you are always getting into pissing matches with other posters, and you have been called out numerous times for your troll-like tendencies. I'm sorry, I hate to be this way, but it gets tough to ignore after a while!
